http://www.salon.com/books/feature/2004/11/15/europe/index.html This article, a review of two books, is chock full of interesting points to debate. It opens with: There's much much more, almost each worthy of its own thread. A brilliant, concise formulation there. And by the way, it's not "seemingly" contradictory, it IS contradictory. If the contradictions don't blow up the current Republican party, then the GOP will become increasingly insane. Again, that above could probably be itself a great starting point for a thread. Anyway, one of my concerns about Bush's policy is that he went way past just "going it alone," he actively alienated Europe, pretty much dared them to create an alternative power center. Guess what? They did. You can't just go around taunting an entity with the latent power of Europe, and not expect a reaction. And because Europe is at least attempting to create a more moral foreign policy, and because Europe gives so much more in foreign aid than we do, it'll be impossible for us to challenge their "soft power." OK, they can't challenge our hard power, but guess what? We can't use our hard power anywhere now because we're bogged down in Iraq. Not to mention using it undermines it, and what little soft power we have left. (If the writer was a soccer geek, he would have mentioned how club soccer is so pan-European, and itself is undermining nationalism. He does give Beckham a shout-out.) I found that very interesting. I've often suspected this, but it's interesting to see that someone who has done research thinks this. How would the US stack up to "Europe" if we just measured "useful stuff?" Even more troubling, how would we stack up against Germany, France, Belgium, nations like that? My reaction is, Europe has the better overall strategy, but dammit, there are times when kicking ass (Afghanistan) is clearly the best policy, and we shouldn't hesitate to do it. Of course, Europe was totally with us in Afghanistan. Here's a goodie for BenReilly: For all the uninformed conservatives who regurgitate the US having the best healthcare in the world, this is iteration #227 that tells us otherwise. The writer isn't primarily concerned with US domestic politics, so he doesn't really get into this much more. But I believe that a big problem is that any discussion of child poverty has so many racial overtones that our system can't engage the issue, let alone ameliorate it. The Clintons got screwed when big business didn't go to bat for them in '94 like they'd promised. Well, they're reaping what they sowed. Health care costs are an increasing competitive problem for American business. IOW, most of the favorable demographics, and the favorable economics deriving from that, in the US, are because of immigrants. Suck that, Pete Wilson.
With all due respect, I have lived in Europe for the last 2 years and it has tons of problems. Both US and Europe can't compete with China and India and that is the bottom line.
Interesting article, but Sarge has a point. China, and to a slightly lesser degree, India look to be the emerging powers of this world. With populations of their size, and the speed at which the countries are progressing...
A number of European posters have stated in the 'consequences for Europe' thread after the elections that four more Bush years would strengthen the European identity. Fact is that anti-Bush public opinion in Europe in some cases allows and in some cases forces European countries to ignore the American point of view. So the European ideal actually benefits from the situation. It's not a matter of which economy does better (the American or European) or which has more problems, it's a widening gap between the two, with Europe distancing itself from the US. I'll leave it up to our American posters to judge whether that's a good or a bad thing.
They are progressing all right but not on all levels. China and India will not reach the welfare levels of either Europe or the US in the foreseeable future. The make-up of their society, their history, and the sheer size of their population prevents the establishment of a sizeable middle class, and that's what any prosperous nation needs.
the euro has gained nearly 60% against the dollar since it's low point. obviously good for u.s. exports short term, but still pretty telling.
I hate when Bigsoccer discussions get sidetracked by nonsense. Start your own thread about this, but try to mention a few economic stats like GDP per capita and the literacy rate.
The same could be said about the Australian or Canadian dollars. It's not that the Euro is particularly strong, but that the US Dollar is in a free fall. One can't overstate how badly Bush has mismanaged the economy.
Don't be too quick to count that as a truism. I would say "the evangelical Protestant faith in salvation and the rationalist drive to accumulate wealth and build industry" is not a contradiction. Creating useful products, improving our standard of living, and serving one's fellow man are all biblical concepts that play out in the business world. Many committed Christians recognize this and view their business pursuits as entirely consistent with their personal faith. In fact, since Max Weber's "The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism," there have been a number of folks who observed the correlation between faith and economic success. Niall Ferguson's article in the NY Times last year is just one example: Why America Outpaces Europe (Clue: The God Factor)
Yeah, that's crap. Of course, so is the article in Salon. Political Science departments have had a field day publishing books about how we're sooooo different from Europe, and moving away from them. Rubbish. The differences are only exposed now because there's no common enemy. No threat. And the combination of brusque leaders in Paris and Washington. Clinton's policies were pretty similar to Bush's in many respects (not Iraq, obviously). Kyoto, for instance. Clinton was never going to get it ratified, and he knew it. So did the Europeans. But he said nice things, and they looooved him. Still do. This is nothing more than an uncomfortable spat that will be made up when we either have a goal in common, or when a more amenable set of statesmen come to lead various countries. As for a European identity.........a recent study found that most people in England couldn't name a single German cultural icon alive today. And lets not delve into what, say, the Polish think about Germans, or vice versa. A new continental society and image isn't formed in 50 years considering Europeans spent 3,000 years fighting each other over anything not nailed down. (Not nailed down meaning anything that I can pry off.) Finally, the idiotic point Salon makes about hatred of the US "burgers, SUVs and obesity" is asinine. England is the second most obese country in the world, and the largest consumer of fast food in Europe. Germany's right behind. This is nothing more than skimming the surface. This article is nothing more than another quickfire attempt to spin things we already know into some sort of prescient warning of a new continental drift caused by Bush, which will see Europe rise above. In other words, its another in a long line of pieces of crap. P.S. Why in the world is suburban sprawl a "wasteful economic activity"?
Well I agree that European dislike of the US is not inspired by cultural differnces, it's Bush's government. How different or similar to Clinton he was is pretty irrelevant: fact is Europeans liked Clinton but hate Bush. And I for one have never seen Europe this united. What's interesting (from a European point of view) is that none of the doom scenarios predicted for EU expansion or the introduction of the Euro have come true. We in Western Europe have not seem mass immgration from the new EU member states. What's more, the Euro has not caused major economic problems, and the Euro has in fact developed into strong currency. Meanwhile EU government is finally ready and has declared its intention to form an EU military. All signs of ever greater unity I should think. Meanwhile the USA seem ever more divided.
Our Economy is in super shape if you compare it with Germany for example. Germany wishes their unemployment was in the 5 percent bracket.
Its very relevant. Its all about the packaging, not about the substance. Europeans are confused by pretty tinfoil as easily as Americans. Well, that's what happens when you actually have a cause. No, but you are seeing jobs being shipped there. Yeah, good luck with that one. The common market reforms have hardly been controversial, at least until about 5 years ago. But forming your own military? We'll see how happy some of the more Federalist nations in the EU (read England, and anyone not named France and Germany) respond to Brussels technocrats controlling an army of their nationals. I'm betting not well. "New Europe" might be the most willing to help out, since they don't have much to lose, really. An illusion. The US has been far more divided before. We fought a Civil War, remember?
Talk to an average German and he'll tell you about the Euro. Many Germans I have talk to want the D-mark back. They saw prices skyrocket while their salaries stagnate. Talking about a military and actually paying for one is kind of like wishing for a high class hooker but only having enough money for a street ho.
Excellent point. Considering they also have more leisure time, they are arguably more efficient. Facts don't matter to conservatives any more. The Health Care Crisis (we must say CRISIS) is increasingly becoming a severe economic problem. One would hope that the moral aspects would be sufficient to promote change, but the scope of the problem is increasingly threatening to the entire economy. If we were as efficient as Europe, we would save $500B a year and cover 50 million more people. This is by far the #1 economic and moral problem in America. Our birthrate is much higher than Europe, though. 162 United States 14.14/1000 181 France 12.54 195 United Kingdom 10.99 207 Russia 10.09 208 Spain 10.08 221 Italy 9.18 223 Germany 8.60 Hispanics explain much of our population growth (through immigration and higher birthrates), but our non-Hispanic fertility rate is still much higher than Europe. I'm not too optimistic about Europe's future because of this and their immigration difficulties.
Ignorance is bliss. Our own Department of Labor acknowledges that when the U.S. calculates real unemployment, when discouraged workers stop looking for work, the 2% of the population incarcerated, and the non-benefitted underemployed who sink back into unemployment, real unemployment (the number the US gives to everyone - the OECD, the EU, everyone - but their domestic population, btw) in 2003 was 9 percent, 'bout the same as Europe.* * "Annual Average Unemployment Rate, Civilian Labor Force 16 Years and Older." March 18, 2003. Bureau of Labor Statistics. http://www.bls.gov/cps/prev_yrs.htm ; "Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey." Bureau of Labor Statistics. http://data.bls.gov . "Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey (SIC)." BLS. http://data.bls.gov. 12 August 2003. Now talk about the back-side of all that, i.e. preventable disease, consumer credit boom, crime, etc. The U.S. economy, even with a 2.7 percent growth in 2002, and a steep rise of 4.7 percent in labor productivity - the biggest increase in productivity since 1950 - still had 1.5 million MORE workers leaving the job market altogether.** They simply gave up looking for work altogether. Just because the numbers Executives give you are numbers don't mean that they are universally employed. The very fact that the US gives you and I one set of numbers, and the OECD and the EU and other external bodies a different set of numbers ought to tell you something. ** Here and, here.
??? A key part of the problem is that we got really pissed off at France and Germany because they didn't see Iraq as a common enemy, and one of the writers' theses is that the Iraq war has driven the non-pols in Europe toward pan-Europeism, and toward anti-Americanism.
The US - Europe "Cold War" thing is pure hype. The very real and increasingly broad (and getting starker by the day) differences in economic and cultural/political outlook and performance are VERY important. Sadly, (and possibly the books) the articles (which I read this morning prior to coming over here) fail to drive home that point in favor of the more sensationalist slant. They key differences are economic performance and global political clout. For example, if one were to throw out the military sector for measuring ecnomic output, job and wages for both areas one would find the US in dire straits indeed and Europe hurting a but but still performing decently. From a productivity standpoint doesn't it bother anyone that Europeans manage to live well and have a comparatively (I'm not saying exactly competitive but in the same ballpark) vibrant economy without working themselves to death? I sure does me. I'd literally be willing to riot in the streets if I thought it would buy me 6 weeks paid vacation let alone 10 to 12. 35 hour work week? **********, I'd settle for 45. I would trade A LOT in exchange for that. And don't even get me started about health care. All you conservative bozos who caw "socialized medicine!" and "rationing!" every time the issue is raised seem to conveniently forget that the U.S. trails all of those horribly managed health-care gulags in all key measures of population health; life-expectancy, infant mortality, rate of death due to preventable illnesses (e.g. heart disease, adult-onset diabetes, etc.). And lastly and unmentioned in the articles are the facts that the U.S. has let its global lead in alternative energy technologies and manufacturing slip badly behind in the last eight years or so. Mark my words people, these technologies are going to form the basis for the next big, global economic and manufacturing boom. The Euros (and Japanese) are now WAY out in front of us on these and they are going to surft the demand wave from China and India to a big economic lead when that industry really begins to hit stride in the next five to ten years. Here is the nut graph: In the fight to not only be great nations but great places to live the EU is playing a good game of rope-a-dope with the US; allowing us to follow our rather foolish and fanciful insticts towards confrontation abroad and allowing our over-inflated sense of national superiority in all things economic and social down a blind alley. It's not too late for us. As the writers point out, the US always maintains that advantage of social mobility and can-doism. But if we reamain as blindered and unselfciritical as we are we will indeed fall further and further behind.
because Iraq wasn't. A short war in the Middle East will never do enough to form the core identity of anything. Have you learned nothing from this election? Standing aganist something isn't enough. Are the Europeans shouting "diplomacy" out in the streets or "Bush is a terrorist"? This is a movement that will fade away once the Europeans find the next issue de jour.
It is interesting that you mention Immigration, because that would certainly be an indicator of the "goodness" of Europe Vs America, after all people don't tend to immigrate from a "good" country to a "bad" one. I really don't have any time to get into the details on this but I did a quick search and found that 100,434 Europeans were granted lawful permanent residence in the United States in 2003. http://uscis.gov/graphics/shared/aboutus/statistics/SupplementalTables.htm I couldn't find a quick statistic for American Immigration to Europe. If anybody has some time, and can find this number out, I think it would be an interesting comparison.